Order:
Considering the fact that exams have been conducted in the recent passed, it is a testimony to the fact that SOP is followed by MHA to conduct such exams. Lack of transport facilities across all centres have not been substantiated by the Petitioners.
The Court notes that the submission by the Intervenor that he had to work during the COVID period cannot form the basis for displacing the arrangements that have been made till now.
Court is now dictating the Order.
1. The first submission is that frontline workers are at a handicap to appear in the examination. No consideration has been given by UPSC in this regard.
Sr. Adv. VR Shukla asks for directions to the Railways.
Bench: This is not acceptable. This is a new kind of public interest litigation. You just make allegations and then walk out. You should have made the Railways a party then.
Kapadia: He worked for 18 hours. But, this is a premium institution who wish recruit the best. He even has dengue now.
Bench: We cannot do this for one individual.
Kapadia: It’s not just one person. There are hundreds.
Kapadia submits to the Bench that her client is a COVID warrior and couldn’t take leave for studying.
Bench: Did he make an application asking for leave ?
Kapadia: No. He is a COVID warrior. He couldn’t go on leave. The duty was imposed.
Raju informs the Bench that concessions regarding age will only be made for those who are on their last attempt and/or are about to cross the age-limit and cannot be made available to others.
Bench agrees.
Kapadia asks the Bench to issue instructions regarding railways being available.
“The aspirants may be informed that trains are functioning”.
Bench tells Raju to inform the Railway Authorities.
Bench asks Raju to seek supplementary guidelines from MHA in case there is any lacuna in UPSC’s methods.
Raju: We will seek instructions on this.
Bench asks Raju to take instructions on the aspect of what MHA requires.
Nookala states a point regarding conflict of MHA guidelines with the number of students who will appear.